A Fox News article points to a research study done by the Pew Internet and American Life Project that found that nearly 50 Percent of Americans have little use for Internet and cell Phones.In a nutshell the findings are:

8% are avid and voracious users of all things high tech23% of users embrace technologies for social networking and employment10% rely on mobile devices10% use tech devices but find them a bother49% use tech devices occasionally or are hostile towards high tech

The groups are broken down into 10 different groups of users with one group (8%) being referred to as the "Lackluster Veterans".

I fail to see how using tech devices occasionally and being hostile to them can be lumped together. By their logic they could just as easily have said-

Quote

57% are avid, voracious or occasional users of all things high tech or are hostile towards high tech23% of users embrace technologies for social networking and employment10% rely on mobile devices10% use tech devices but find them a bother

Update- A quick scan of the original report indicates it is being misrepresented, first the figures are relating to connectivity (the internet and mobiles) not high tech in general. The actual results which were combined into the 49% figure are as follows-

Quote

8% Inexperienced Experimenters They occasionally take advantage of interactivity, but if they had more experience, they might do more with ICTs.

15% Light But Satisfied They have some technology, but it does not play a central role in their daily lives. They are satisfied with what ICTs do for them.

11% Indifferents Despite having either cell phones or online access, these users use ICTs only intermittently and find connectivity annoying.

15% Off the NetworkThose with neither cell phones nor internet connectivity tend to be older adults who are content with old media.

Which paints a very different picture I think.

P.S. Cpilot, I know you didn't misquote the original halfbytes blog so my disagreements with it here are not aimed at you at all

I fail to see how using tech devices occasionally and being hostile to them can be lumped together. By their logic they could just as easily have said-

Quote

57% are avid, voracious or occasional users of all things high tech or are hostile towards high tech23% of users embrace technologies for social networking and employment10% rely on mobile devices10% use tech devices but find them a bother

If you read through the entire study (the link to the pdf is at the bottom of the blog post) it'll give you an idea of their methods and how they arrived at their conclusions.They go into much more detail about each category of users and how they arrived at the method for classification.Like any survey/poll type of study take from what you will, but I think it does point out a definite divide between certain committed technology types and casual users.

Update- A quick scan of the original report indicates it is being misrepresented, first the figures are relating to connectivity (the internet and mobiles) not high tech in general. The actual results which were combined into the 49% figure are as follows-

Quote

8% Inexperienced Experimenters They occasionally take advantage of interactivity, but if they had more experience, they might do more with ICTs.

15% Light But Satisfied They have some technology, but it does not play a central role in their daily lives. They are satisfied with what ICTs do for them.

11% Indifferents Despite having either cell phones or online access, these users use ICTs only intermittently and find connectivity annoying.

15% Off the NetworkThose with neither cell phones nor internet connectivity tend to be older adults who are content with old media.

Which paints a very different picture I think.

P.S. Cpilot, I know you didn't misquote the original halfbytes blog so my disagreements with it here are not aimed at you at all

The 49% figure came from the preface/title page of the original report. The numbers you quoted are from further into the report where the analysis takes place and methods and classifications are explained.I think the results are worthy of discussion, different people can interpret the data in whichever way they see it.

On a very limited scale, I thought you all might be interested in this: I am working to establish a Lifetime Learning Institute for persons aged 55 and older in my community. Of the people who have expressed an interest so far, almost 79% stated a preference to receive all communications through email and to register through a website. All committee and council correspondence is through email. No email = no participation.

While I don't claim that this is representative, I mention it in furtherance of myth-busting.

When you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to be a horrible warning - Catherine Aird

Exactly.I didn't post the article to expect anyone to accept it as a hard fact.But I think it is indicative of how the web, and who's using it and for what, has changed in the last decade.And maybe it'll make people rethink about how they are looking at it. Because not all people see connecting and using the web the same way.It could be useful in determining how to reach out to those who aren't quite as invested as most are here.

Statistics aside, we need to acknowledge that there is a large number of people who use tech products and are connected to the Internet, and then there are others who do not use tech products and do not use a connection to the Internet.

Now regardless of the number of people in each group, we know there is a divide, but possibly not as neat as one might want to describe, because there will be some who connect to the Internet infrequently, and those that use a mobile phone like it is a computer but don't like going online with a PC. And every other abberation one can think about.

Building some type of a model in our heads of those who are tech users and who are connected, against those not tech saavy, we can then go ahead and do some marketing. Some in conventional paper formats, such as daily newspapers and magazines, and some online advertising and marketing sites.

Now this is the world in which I have lived for more than 10 years. I know that we get more sales from general print than online advertising even for tech products, and we go by results not artificial statistics about who is online and offline.

What works is to read the history of similar products and their sales and alter spending likewise. Statistics like included earlier are myths.